KSUplanning

media type="custom" key="6567729"
 * My PREZI

Workshop title:Developing Rubrics **

By the end of the hour, participants will have worked from examples to select a rubric approach and create a rubric for one of their own assessments clapping game as Bridge-in AND pre-assessment Using blank rubrics, participants nominate criteria for one of their assignments – whether a project, presentation, participation, etc. (paying attention to priority and weighting within criteria if necessary) They fill in the rubric and then see what it would look like in one other format They get feedback from group peers about whether it seems comprehensible to students and usable by graders Use a rubric to rate their own rubric? Alignment of rubric with outcomes of an assignment, sharing it in advance or having students participate in its creation, remaining questions (parking lot) Blank rubrics: landscape criteria 4-or 5-column, letter-oriented 3-column Rubric samples: holistic, criteria, expectations (in different disciplines and assignments) If clapping game, criteria postersmedia type="youtube" key="3VcfhfUFeRA" height="385" width="640"
 * Bridge-in: PhD Comics image or image of different inequitable approaches to marking, OR clapping game, short version… **
 * Outcomes/Objectives **
 * Pre-Assessment **
 * Participatory Learning **
 * Post-Assessment **
 * Summary **
 * Supplies and tech: **


 * Workshop title: Group Grading **


 * Bridge-in: Give another group a grade on their Monday morning task **

By the end of the session, participants will be able to select methods of group assessment (instructor, peer, self or combination) appropriate to their assignment objectives Pros and cons of assigning a single grade to a group project or product Pros and cons of adding an individual component to group grading Different models of group grading – process criteria and numerical differences assessed by peers (and self) Review the different models (website, handouts) and try to grade Monday’s team work with one new tool Did it work (in small groups) 5 minutes to try it out based on course or assignment objectives of their own (weighting of the assignment might or might not change) Go over Tip Sheet and sources Remind that it’s dependent on objectives and people need practice with peer and self-assessment BEFORE the high stakes summative task.
 * Outcomes/Objectives **
 * Pre-Assessment **
 * Participatory Learning **
 * Post-Assessment **
 * Summary **

Teaching tips website preloaded. Show book or two? Handouts: blank differential grading forms including my own
 * Supplies and tech: **


 * Workshop title: Improving interaction and discussion **

Show clip of questioner with no answers By the end of the session, participants will have tried at least three methods of interactive discussion (Jigsaw, object passing or contributing, and gallery walk or pair share?) Pass the Frisbee… problems with discussion-based teaching … 10 seconds with the Frisbee Jigsaw with UW admissions brochures, stats, etc. Discussion with “admission tix” What was different about this than about any other discussion you’ve had so far last week or this week? What problems were addressed by these techniques? Mark’s Top 5 rules to make discussion more interactive
 * Bridge-in **
 * Outcomes/Objectives **
 * Pre-Assessment **
 * Participatory Learning **
 * Post-Assessment **
 * Summary **
 * Supplies and tech: Frisbee, popsicle sticks, admissions tickets, Weimer ideas and others on a ppt **


 * Workshop title: Assessing critical thinking **


 * Bridge-in: show video of my student and explain my grading challenge **

Participants will be able to identify elements of critical thinking Participants will be able to apply their knowledge of rubrics and other assessment techniques (such as logs and journals) to the assessment of critical thinking in a given object Participants will be able to plan transfer to their own teaching practice in a specific assignment Deepening the thinking: moving from reaction to reflection to critical reflection (ask for questions that go deeper than reaction) Participants to assess level of criticality of a newspaper article in imprint using a variety of rubrics, one kind per table (holistic, criteria, Wolf’s, none…) How well did grades compare at each table and across tables? How these things can move into assignments in different disciplines (even a solution log in math) Critical thinking rubrics (Holistic, Peter Wolf’s, Value, my own?)
 * Outcomes/Objectives **
 * Pre-Assessment **
 * Participatory Learning **
 * Post-Assessment **
 * Summary **
 * Supplies and tech: **


 * Workshop title: Large class teaching **


 * Bridge-in **


 * Outcomes/Objectives **


 * Pre-Assessment **


 * Participatory Learning **


 * Post-Assessment **


 * Summary **

Teaching Large Classes Green Guide…
 * Supplies and tech: **